Varun Gandhi fixed hate speech case, says Tehelka

An expose by Tehelka magazine Wednesday said that its "investigation proves that not only did Varun make the venomous speeches he is accused of, he has compounded the original wrong by brazenly subverting the entire judicial process to get his name cleared".

Varun Gandhi was appointed a national general secretary of the BJP in the recasting of the party's his national team after Rajnath Singh took over as BJP president.

Varun Gandhi. File pic

Varun Gandhi was accused of making hate speeches while campaigning for his first election to the Lok Sabhha from Pilibhit constituency, which was earlier represented by his mother Menaka Gandhi.

Tehelka said: "He has also indulged in anti-party activities, deliberately making his own party candidate lose an assembly election in Uttar Pradesh in 2012 so that a Samajwadi Party (SP) leader sympathetic to him could win and help him fix the cases against him."

Eighty-eight witnesses that turned hostile during the trial were caught on hidden cameras in the sting operation. They admitted that "they were coerced or bribed into changing their testimonies. They speak of how Pilibhit Superintendent of Police Amit Verma and other police officers threatened witnesses."

"In one instance, a witness claims he received a call directly from Varun's office," says the magazine.

"The witnesses", Tehelka says, "also speak of how the judicial process was turned completely on its head; how their testimonies were taken in the absence of the judge; how their statements were crafted by the lawyers and their thumb impressions or signatures taken; of how they were not cross-examined, often not even summoned to present their testimonies".

Tehelka says that its "investigation also found that Public Prosecutor MP Verma - tasked with upholding the law of the land and bringing the guilty to justice - and the court itself were suspiciously negligent in following due process in bringing the high-profile leader to justice."

Tehelka says "18 witnesses were examined in a span of just two days. They all turned hostile, but neither the public prosecutor nor the court raised any flags. They failed to object even when other witnesses gave blatantly contradictory statements."